Friday, August 30, 2013

A coalition of states recently issued a notice to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of intent to sue.States want to end delays in
implementing overdue New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for wood burning
appliances.Further, states want
the EPA to include new classes of wood burning appliances in the NSPS.Particularly, wood boilers, also known
as hydronic heaters for indoor and outdoor use, are described by the states as
being major contributors to airborne pollution. The seven page notice is laden
with statistics and is heavily footnoted.

What is surprising is that the states, after many years of
voicing concerns about the accuracy of claims made in wood burning appliance
advertising, have themselves made expedient claims in their intent to sue.For instance, the statement that European appliances
have increased efficiency from 55% to over 90% is not the complete story.
Efficiency numbers can be stated a number of different ways. For
instance, the Fröling FHG wood boiler was recently tested by Brookhaven.
The technology the boiler uses is generally considered BDT for residential wood
boilers. Its rated seasonal efficiency at HHV was 68% according to
Brookhaven. The European test gives the same boiler an efficiency of 88%.
When people use efficiency numbers that are not clearly defined, it confuses
the situation. The very state regulators who get upset about the
overstatement of efficiency numbers by wood appliance advertisers should know
better than to play the same game.

In the very next paragraph the states laud the Europeans for stringent
emission and efficiency limits.The very states that are party to the intent to sue notice could have
supported a European style emissions test years ago, but have instead delayed
emission and efficiency testing by trying to create new, more accurate test
methods based on real world conditions.To threaten the EPA over time delays while not encouraging the adoption
of European style emission and efficiency testing many years ago is seems like
an unjustified position to take.

In more
than one location in the notice of intent to sue, states claim that use of
indoor and outdoor boilers is increasing. With time the number of hydronic
heaters sold in aggregate will always increase, but how many are also going to
the junk yard? Many early outdoor wood boilers have rotted out and are no
longer in use. 1970s oil crisis boilers are being retired as parts become
hard to come by in some cases. Old smoky boilers are less in favor than
they once were which makes sales values closer to scrap values. The word is getting out about wood smoke
pollution.Together with an
economy that is down, energy conservation efforts, and proliferation of other
renewable energy technologies, the claim that the use of boilers is increasing
is dubious and unsupported by any data.There is no need to over-state or to sensationalize.It is clear that there are offensive
wood burning appliances that not only pollute heavily, but are sullying the
reputation of the wood burning industry.Time and public sentiment are not on the side of these products.

Regulators
missed the boat by waiting 25 years to update the NSPS.One must wonder why states are at long
last taking legal action with such verbose claims against the EPA.EPA implementation of the NSPS is
unfortunately going to have little effect on air pollution from wood burning
appliances in the near future.There
are simply too many appliances in operation to rely only on regulation of new
appliances to clear the air.We
now have to wait for all of polluting appliances now in use to die off.
That will take 20 years.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

With the first Wood Stove Decathlon only a few months away, we are profiling each of the teams. Learn more about how they hope to win the competition!

Wittus – Fire by Design has entered into the Decathlon their EPA certified Twinfire stove. The stove was originally designed by two German engineers to create an efficient burning method and offset air pollution in developing countries. It uses a patented double combustion chamber to maximize its efficiency through gasification, a process that superheats wood gas to reach a claimed 93% efficient wood burning capacity. The upper chamber is the main firebox used to build and tend the fire. The lower chamber is the exterminator that burns any remaining ash down to bits.

The Twinfire stands in a long line of Wittus products that are dedicated to high efficiency, low emissions, and an attractive design. The Twinfire has won several prestigious European awards including the German Land of Ideas award in 2012. Founder Niels Wittus values the quality of these stoves and strives to create smart stove designs to maintain a healthy environment. Perhaps his background and passion for cooking has brought the health and detail oriented mindset to selecting the best ingredients to making a top quality wood stove.

In Denmark, Wittus was set to apprentice at a high-scale restaurant, but after a trip to the US, he decided to stay. Over 30 years later, Wittus is keeping the Danish brændeovn or wood stove tradition alive, combining it with the modern style and state-of-the-art technology of an American businessman.

Even with the busy schedule, hard work, and resulting success, Wittus still holds on to his passion for cooking. At business gatherings and dinners, he treats his team members, Bodo Specht, Alyce Wittus, Sandra Lena, Patti Boker Elkon, and Gail Jankus to some wood fire grilling.

Friday, August 23, 2013

Median household income has
declined 4.4% since the official end of the recession in 2009, and is
6% lower than when we went into the recession in 2007. This enduring reduction
in the buying power of the American consumer may lead to a continued increase in
the use of wood and pellets, as more Americans seek cheaper alternatives to
oil, propane, and electric heating.

Source: The Washington Post. Fletcher, Michael.
"Four years after end of recession, incomes remain depressed

It is likely that the surge in wood
heating between 2000 and 2010 was partly due to reduced buying power and job
loss. During that time, wood and pellets were the fastest growing heating fuel
in America. States where unemployment was the highest typically saw even higher
growth in wood heating.

New studies show that lower income
families have locked in that reduced buying power since the end of the recession. Income growth in America over the past 10
years has disproportionately gone to the top and very top income groups. Those
income groups may be installing high-end outdoor kitchens and fireplaces, but
they rarely use wood or pellets as a primary heating source. Rather, the lower
income groups are more likely to rely on wood as a primary heating fuel,
according to Census Bureau statistics.

The long-term reduced buying power
of Americans is also likely contributing to the growth in the sales of less
expensive wood stoves such as those sold at big box stores. Industry experts say sales of wood
and pellet stoves at large hardware chains has grown significantly in the last
5 years.It also may be leading to
more sales of very cheap stoves that are exempt from EPA emission standards.And, it is likely leading to more
families continuing to rely on older stoves, instead of upgrading to newer,
cleaner and more efficient stoves.

Inflation adjusted median household
income is now about $52,000, compared to about $56,000 before the recession.
What is notable is that while unemployment continues to drop, from a high of
10% to 7.5%, median income has not risen.Energy costs take a much bigger bite out of the incomes of families who
are below the median income range, leading to energy insecurity and reduced use
of HVAC systems.

Monday, August 19, 2013

With the first Wood Stove Decathlon
only a few months away, we are doing a weekly blog to showcase the Decathlon
competitors. Take this opportunity to learn more about the design teams and
their stove’s innovative features.

“When we started, stoves were basically six-sided boxes,
and you put a fire in it. Now we’re making equipment, with a lot of moving
parts. The technology is much better and increasing rapidly,” said Tom
Morrissey, owner of Woodstock
Soapstone Co. in West Lebanon, New Hampshire, which has been building
cordwood-burning stoves for 35 years. For the Decathlon Woodstock Soapstone has
entered their Union Hybrid stove.

The stove includes many technological aspects that make it a strong competitor in this year’s Decathlon. It uses an advanced hybrid combustion design incorporating both catalyst and secondary combustion. It has variable and self-regulating air/fuel ratio in order to maximize combustion efficiency and minimize emissions at all burn rates. Also, the soapstone body helps radiate heat for high heat transfer efficiency.

“We are essentially making a gasification stove,” he said, “If you look at this thing when it’s burning, the fire does not look like what you would think of as a wood fire. The whole top of firebox is like an inverted gas burner; there are 120 holes with a tube of flame coming out of each one.”

In development at Woodstock Soapstone are two beta-test modules: a Thermoelectric Module and a remote Woodstove Monitor. The module powers a small fan that assists with heat transfer. The power produced may also be used to charge a cell phone or LED light.

User responsibility and effectiveness are key to an efficient and low emission wood stove. Computers have largely cut out the need for a human operator in many technological fields, but Woodstock Soapstone hopes to avoid the added expense of computer controls. Instead, they will employ a remote Woodstove Monitor. It will provide real-time feedback on burn rate, BTU output, efficiency, emissions, and stove temperatures.

“Burning wood without this information is like driving a car without a speedometer and gas gauge,” said Morrissey. Knowing this information will help stove owners use their stoves more responsibly and effectively.

“Ten years ago, you could never imagine having a little computer on the stove. If you were in a small industry like ours, you couldn’t dream of having a graphic-user- interface, but now it’s available and affordable,” Morrissey said. The Union Hybrid stove, with its 21st century technology and efficiency and emissions capabilities, is certainly a far cry from a six-sided box with a fire in it.

Australia is in the
process of developing stricter emission standards for wood heaters
and their approach is a fascinating glimpse into another regulatory
culture. The strategies and cost – benefit analysis in Australia
should be a valuable comparison for the EPA as it finalizes its New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for US wood heaters. This post is
an overview of an Australian report showing the financial gains
created by stricter regulations on wood heaters.

In 2011 the Council of
Australian Governments (COAG) identified air quality as a Priority
Issue of National Significance
and agreed that the COAG Standing Council on Environment and Water
(SCEW) would develop a National Plan for Clean Air to improve air
quality, and community health and well being, to be delivered to COAG
by the end of 2014. The first stage of the National Plan for Clean
Air will focus on particle emission reductions and a consultation
Regulation Impact Statement which assesses alternative policy options
that could be employed to reduce emissions from wood heaters in
Australia, and establishes their relative costs and benefits.

The current Australian
Standards that cover wood heater emissions and efficiency set a
criterion of 4 grams of particulate matter (PM10) per
kilogram of fuel brunt (4g/kg). There is currently no efficiency
criterion, but efficiency results must be reported on a label
permanently attached to the appliance.

The report showed a
large range of potential policy measures that could be implemented to
reduce emissions from wood heaters. The potential measures fall into
three major categories:

wood heater design
or performance standards;

measures to promote
compliance of retail models against these standards; and

These measures could be
delivered through a range of policy 'vehicles'. The policy delivery approaches examined are
a voluntary national program, a collaborative approach or a national regulatory approach.

Under the
business-as-usual or 'base case' scenario, particulate emissions from
wood heaters in Australia are
expected to fall by around 5000 tons (or 12%) over the next twenty
years, as old heaters are progressively replaced with new, lower
particulate emitting heaters. The reduction in annual particulate
emissions from wood heaters under the policy options examined, over
and above the business-as-usual reductions, range from 3% to 18%.

The estimated costs to
government of implementing the different policy options range from
$15 million over the next twenty years to around $39 million. The
estimated costs to manufacturers range from $240,000 to $17 million, the
strictest boasting an efficiency standard of 60% as well as an
emission limit of 1.5 g/kg. The health benefits of the options are
estimated to range from $760 million to around $1,850 million over the
twenty year assessment period. Although the greatest emission
reductions are estimated for the most expensive option, the highest
health benefits are estimated for another which has a shorter
phase-in period for the new standards. The estimated benefits far
outweigh the estimated costs of all options included in the analysis.
The present value of the net benefits range from around $750 million to
$1,800 million.

The report concludes
the greatest net benefits are likely to be achieved via a national
regulatory approach for managing wood heater emissions, rather than
through a voluntary or collaborative approach. This could be
achieved either through a Commonwealth regulation, a National
Environment Protection Measure (NEPM) or through mirror legislation.

Monday, August 12, 2013

With the first Wood Stove Decathlon
only a few months away, we here at the Alliance
for Green Heat have started a weekly blog to showcase the Decathlon
competitors. Take this opportunity to learn more about the design teams and
their stove’s innovative features.

One of the European finalists of the Decathlon is the
newly developed HWAM 3630 IHS
from the Danish manufacturer HWAM. The stove is run
by an oxygen sensor and computer, and even beeps when it’s the optimal time to
reload more wood. This is one of the finalists that is already on the market and retails for $4,216.

HWAM has had a longstanding ambition to develop a more intelligent
stove to heighten the technological level of its products. Helping the consumer
burn wood with minimal attention to the stove and no experience necessary,
while achieving the same results at home that are obtained in test labs under
ideal conditions are key to their innovation philosophy.

HWAM founder Vagn Hvam Pedersen is the leading creative and
technical mind behind the stove. He has outfitted the stove with advanced
technology and a sleek, modern European design. For the Hvam Pederson family
the stove is the center point of the home for the family to gather in comfort
and warmth. Hvam Pedersen built the family owned business from the ground up
until it ignited to become an internationally renowned company.

The innovation behind the HWAM 3630 IHS rests in the Autopilot
Intelligent Heat System (IHS). This system allows for precise control over the
stove’s combustion and temperature. The system uses a lambda oxygen sensor and
a thermocouple to electronically measure combustion conditions. These
measurements are then sent to a computer that automatically regulates three
independent fans to control airflow for optimum combustion. The temperature of
the fire may also be controlled through a remote control, as the fans adjust
their speed accordingly.

The advantage for the consumer to have IHS is that an
optimum burn means the most efficient use of firewood. This puts less of a
strain on the stove owner’s fuel and the environment. The concept of the stove
is to work around a potentially inexperienced owner to offset human error when
possible. HWAM has even been awarded the Nordic Ecolabel after following
strict environmental regulations. The stove must comply with rigorous limits on
local air pollution and emissions of dangerous substances such as carbon
monoxide and hydrocarbons.

Friday, August 9, 2013

Regulations are now being
drafted and reviewed that would place certain labeling and recordkeeping
requirement on companies moving firewood across state borders. According the
USDA, in essence the regulations would require that the location of the production
facility of the firewood be on the label, along with the county or counties
from which the trees used to produce the firewood were harvested. If a treatment
was applied, then a final labeling element would be required to verify heat
treatment and the schedule.

On
the record keeping side, firewood producers would need to keep and provide upon
request records of where, from whom, and in what quantities they received the wood used
to make the firewood. The same is required for shipments of firewood to
customers. The USDA says that they are not considering any requirement on
information about the costs of or revenues received from those
transactions. Firewood distributors would need to keep similar records
(volume received and from whom, volume sold or shipped and to
whom). Retailers would need records of incoming inventory and total sales
volume.

According
to the USDA, the regulations are still in draft form and working their way
through the required review processes prior to publication as a proposed rule. The
opportunity to review the language and comment will occur during the public
comment period after publication as a proposed rule in the Federal
Register. The publication date is undetermined at this time because of the
time various reviewers take to review regulations varies
from reviewer to reviewer. It is unlikely that the firewood labeling and record
keeping regulations would be published this calendar year.

The
labeling and record keeping requirements described above are predicated on the
National Firewood Task Forces’ (NFTF) recommendations for best management
practices for firewood. That document can be found here (among other
places on the internet):

Abstract: This rulemaking
would require that commercial firewooddestined to be moved interstate be affixed with a label on which thecounty and State, or counties and
States, in which the wood from which the firewood was produced was harvested,
the site at which the firewood was produced, what phytosanitary treatment, if
any, the firewood has received, and contact information for reporting
detections of suspected plant pests are prominently and legibly displayed. We
would also require firewood producers, distributors, and retailers to
retainrecords regarding the
manufacturing, purchase, and sale of the firewood. Although the movement of
commercial firewood in interstate commerce can be a pathway for numerous plant
pests, this movement is currently largely unregulated. This action would aid in
preventing the further dissemination of plant pests within the United States
through the interstate movement of firewood.

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

With the first Wood Stove Decathlon
only a few months away, we are doing weekly blog posts to showcase the
Decathlon teams and the innovative technology they are developing.

The SmartStoveTM control
system was developed to introduce very affordable, modern technology to
wood-burning products that seem locked in the past. SmartstoveTM uses a thermocouple,
microprocessor, and controller to automate airflow throughout the combustion
cycle of the stove. Thus, stoves are not allowed to smolder, not to overfire, but
rather to operate at optimal temperatures.

In 1998, Dan McFarland, an electrical engineer, began
heating his home with an EPA certified fireplace insert. After six years
of what began feeling like babysitting the stove, he searched the web for a
control system product to take over for him. After discovering it did not
exist, he began formulating a method to develop his own. In 2005, the first
functioning proof-of-concept prototype exceeded his expectations, reliably
managing the draft control for him, keeping the fire burning clean and
maximizing the burn time. As Plato stated, “necessity is the mother of
invention.”

With the encouragement of some close friends, McFarland
continued the self-funded development of what evolved into the intelligent and
versatile SmartStoveTM control
system, a powerful device the size of a regular thermostat.

By the winter of 2006, he developed an upgraded system
that added proportional control of the insert’s blowers, enabling the
system to efficiently manage a fire and also optimize heat
transfer into the home, reducing the need for backup heat on cold nights.

The next year, SmartStoveTM made
its first public appearance at the HPB Expo in Reno, Nev. While some expo
attendees and fellow exhibitors could not imagine computerized controls on a
wood stove, others were excited by the project and encouraged McFarland to
continue.

The following year, after developing upgraded system
architecture, a stove manufacturer requested to evaluate the system on one of
their new stove designs. After delivering a stove fully retrofitted
with SmartStoveTM,
and excitement by the manufacturer about the success of the project, the
subprime economic crisis stalled development as stove manufacturers moved to
protect their finances. SmartStoveTM system
was upgraded again in 2010 to add a radio link between the User Interface wall
panel and the stove.

SmartStoveTM system is now shipped to
individuals who are searching, much like McFarland was, for a control system to
integrate into their own stoves.

SmartStoveTM will
be hosting an open house and fundraiser, including demonstrations of the
system, on Saturday, Oct. 12. Further information and updates about the system
and event will be available on the Inven Inc. website,Twitter, andFacebook.

Friday, August 2, 2013

Explanation
of the Office of Management and Budget Process for the Wood Heater New Source
Performance Standard

Prepared for the Alliance for Green Heat by the law firm Van Ness Feldman, LLP

Introduction

On July 26,
2013 the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) received for review the Standards
of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic
Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces, and New Residential Masonry Heaters
(hereinafter referred to as the “Wood Heater NSPS”). The following discussion explains the role of
OMB in the rulemaking process and notes some specific information about the
Wood Heater NSPS page on OMB’s website, which can be found here: http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201304&RIN=2060-AP93.

Background on the OMB Process

The
particular section of OMB that reviews significant draft regulations is called
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). OIRA reviews rulemakings to determine whether EPA
has considered various alternatives as well as to ensure coordination between
federal agencies to avoid inconsistent, incompatible, or duplicative policies. OIRA reviews approximately 500-700 rules a
year. OIRA can “return” a rule to the
drafting agency for further review if it finds that the proposal is deficient. Often such a process occurs when an agency has
not sufficiently examined alternatives in the proposed rule. OIRA also can suggest that changes be made to
a rule before it is released in final form.

The process
of regulatory review is designed to help improve the rulemaking process and
create coherent policies across all the agencies of government. The OMB website notes, “Regulatory analysis
is a tool regulatory agencies use to anticipate and evaluate the likely
consequences of rules. It provides a
formal way of organizing the evidence on the key effects – good and bad – of the
various alternatives that should be considered in developing regulations. The motivation is to: (1) learn if the benefits of an action are
likely to justify the costs, or (2) discover which of various possible
alternatives would be the most cost-effective.” http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/OIRA_QsandAs/.

OMB is
required to review a rule within 90 days, but there is no minimum period for
review. The head of the rulemaking
agency may extend the review period. In
addition, the Director of OMB also has the ability to extend the review, but
not by more than 30 days. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/OIRA_QsandAs/. In practice, however, OMB sometimes takes far
longer than 90 days to review a rule, and in rare cases rules can stay at OMB
for years. If the Executive Branch does
not want to finalize a rule, it can instead leave it marooned at OMB. Thus, it is best to think of 90 days as a
general rule of thumb from which OMB sometimes deviates, although legally they
are required to act within the 90 day review period unless an extension is
received.

Information on Wood Heater NSPS Process

As noted
earlier, the Wood Heater NSPS was received by OMB for review on July 26th. In addition to the general process explained
above, there is some specific information about the Wood Heater NSPS that is
helpful to understand when consulting the page on the OMB website which tracks
rules.

First, note
that “NPRM” stands for “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.” The date for the NPRM listed on the OMB page
is September 2013. This is the
aspirational date for EPA to release the proposed rule after OMB review. There is no settlement agreement pursuant to
which EPA is required to release the Wood Heater NSPS by a particular date. Given that the rule went to OMB in late July,
it is possible that the deadline will slip and the rule will not be released
until late October or November if OMB takes the whole 90 day period to review
the rule.

EPA’s
website lists the publication date for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in
November, not September. http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/rulegate.nsf/byRIN/2060-AP93.
It is likely that it will take several
weeks after the release of the pre-publication version of the rule before it can
be published in the Federal Register.
Therefore, if the pre-publication
version is released in late September, in may not be published in the Federal Register until November 2013. Publication will set the time frame for
public comment.

The date listed
for the final rule, November 2014, is similarly a statement of when EPA would
like to release the final rule, which includes time for responding to comments received
on the proposed rule. Again, because
there is no litigation over EPA’s delayed timing for this rulemaking, this date
also is aspirational. While EPA’s listed
date means that the Agency has every intention of hitting this marker, it does
not always happen. It is not possible to
say precisely how easy it is to push back the date, other than to note that there
are no litigants or a presiding court with which to negotiate, and thus there
is much about the timing that is within the Agency’s discretion. It is important to point out that the Agency could
always be sued for delay in issuing its revised NSPS, and if the litigants
prevail, a more truncated schedule for the rulemaking may be set by a
settlement agreement.

In addition
to the dates for the proposed and final rules, some of the terms listed on the
OMB page are helpful to understand. First,
it states that “the statutory final rule deadline is not driving the schedule
for this action” and lists “2/26/1996” as the date for the statutory deadline. This is because under the Clean Air Act, EPA
is required to update the NSPS every eight years. The last time the Wood Heater NSPS was amended
was 1988. Thus, technically, the
standards were required to be reviewed in 1996, which means the Agency has
fallen woefully behind its schedule for updating the rule. Consequently, the page correctly notes that
the statutory deadline is not “driving the schedule” for this action.

The page
also has a notation that states “small entities affected: businesses.” The listing in this document is not a
conclusion, but just a required statement.
As the EPA’s website explains, “EPA notifies the public when a
rulemaking is likely to 1) have any adverse economic impact on small entities
even though a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis may not be required and/or 2)
have significant adverse economic impacts on a substantial number of small
entities. http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/rulegate.nsf/byRIN/2060-AP93#2. Thus, this listing puts the pubic on notice
that small businesses may be impacted by this rulemaking proceeding and that
the appropriate small business analyses will be conducted.

Further,
the page includes the notations “priority: economically significant” and
“unfunded mandates: no.” Like the small
entities notation, these are both required to be disclosed to the public. A
rule is economically significant if it has potential economic impact of $100
million or more per year, or could “adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities.” http://www.reginfo.gov/public/jsp/Utilities/faq.jsp. Economically significant rules require a more
extensive review of the costs and benefits.
The notation that there are no unfunded mandates denotes that the rule
does not impose large burdens on state, local, or tribal entities without
providing the resources to carry out those responsibilities.

Substantive Description of the Wood Heater NSPS

In addition
to the items above, the OMB page includes a description of what is to be
included in the rulemaking. First, it
should be noted that this description holds no legal weight and is just an
attempt to summarize what will be in the rule. Specific terms include:

·That the rule will “reflect significant
advancements in wood heater technologies and design;”

·“This rule is expected to require manufacturers
to redesign wood heaters to be cleaner and lower emitting;” and

·“[S]treamline the process for testing new model
lines by allowing the use of International Standards Organization
(ISO)-accredited laboratories and certifying bodies, which will expand the
number of facilities that can be used for testing and certification of new
model lines.”

Each of these terms explains what is
expected to be in the rule; however, this summary is purely descriptive and is
not binding on the Agency. The
description simply represents what EPA was willing to put forth as a summary of
the rule’s contents. The text listed on
the OMB site is the same as the abstract found on EPA’s website regarding the
proposed rulemaking. http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/rulegate.nsf/byRIN/2060-AP93#2. The description is meant to inform the public
about the possible changes in the current NSPS, but EPA’s website includes a
disclaimer which notes, “The information on this site is not intended to and
does not commit EPA to specific conclusions or actions. For example, after further analysis, EPA may
decide the effects of a rule would be different or it may decide to terminate a
rulemaking.” http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/rulegate.nsf/byRIN/2060-AP93#2.